MEAWW.COM / NEWS / HUMAN INTEREST

Roe v Wade effect: 47 Republicans vote YES to protect same-sex marriage, Internet says 'times have changed'

The House of Representatives voted on Tuesday, July 19, to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, which would codify same-sex marriage into law

The House of Representatives voted on Tuesday, July 19, to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, which would codify same-sex marriage into law. The bill is headed to the Senate with a 267-157 vote, and as many as 47 House Republicans have voted in favor of the bill. The ones who voted in favor of the bill include Reps Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Mike Garcia of California, Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, and John Katko of New York.

Should the Respect for Marriage Act pass the Senate and be signed by the president, it will repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. This would ensure the recognition of same-sex marriage across the board, and provide a definition of marriage for federal purposes to include gay marriage. It would also prohibit any person acting under the color of state law from "failing to give full effect to an out of state marriage" on the basis of sex, race, gender, or national origin.

ALSO READ

Hayley Hasselhoff shows off her famous curves as she shatters beauty standards at Miami Swim Week

The Horrifying Last Days of Little Charlie: Officials under fire after 6-yr-old dies of UTTER NEGLECT

The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade created concerns over the legality of same-sex marriage. Overturning Roe v Wade reversed federal abortion rights, with its ruling in the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization case. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's opinion in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization said the decision should affect only abortion and no other rights. "Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion," Alito wrote, according to Insider. 

On the other hand, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative, wrote in his concurring opinion that the court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." Thomas referenced to three landmark decisions regarding the right to access contraception, the invalidation of anti-sodomy laws, and the right to same-sex marriage.

'The right to marry for everyone, no matter who they love'

Politicians who voted in favor of the bill took to Twitter to express their joy, and also to slam those who voted against it. "We just voted to protect same sex marriage. 157 Republicans voted no. Let me say that again. It’s 2022, and 157 Republicans — including @GOPLeader — voted to render hundreds of thousands of marriages null and void on the whim of an out of control Supreme Court," Rep Gerry Connolly wrote on Twitter.

"I voted to protect the right to marry for everyone, no matter who they love. The Respect for Marriage Act enshrines and protects marriage equality for same sex & interracial couples," Rep Jahana Hayes said while Rep André Carson wrote, "Today I voted for the bipartisan Respect for Marriage Act that will protect marriage equality for same sex and interracial couples guaranteed by Obergefell and Loving in federal law, repeal the Defense Of Marriage Act, and provide more legal protections for marriage equality." "H. R. 8404 is about civil rights I am voting YES on H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act. This legislation has been introduced to ensure additional security of the constitutional right to same sex and interracial marriage," Rep Lou Correa said.

'A slap in the face of our federalist system'

Some of the politicians who voted against the bill also took to Twitter to express their opinions. "Today I voted NO on H.R. 8404 – the erroneously named “Respect for Marriage” Act. In a fit of hysteria triggered by one sentence in a concurring opinion by Justice Thomas, Democrats have moved to introduce a bill codifying Obergefell v. Hodges," Rep Matt Gaetz said. "This holding is not in jeopardy. Gay marriage doesn’t offend me nearly as much as offending federalism does through this legislation." "Today I voted NO on H.R.8404, the "Respect for Marriage Act." It's a slap in the face of our federalist system that is just the latest effort to impose their leftist agenda on the entire country," wrote Rep Jody Hice.

'Times have changed'

Social media celebrated and hailed the ones who voted for the bill. "Times have changed and people have grown," one user said. "47 Republicans voted yes today in support of the Respect for Marriage Act, and the bill has now passed in the House. This bipartisan vote both affirms settled law, and offers comfort to millions across the nation," another wrote. 

"All 157 Republicans who just voted against codifying same sex marriage into law must be voted out of office," one user wrote. "157 republicans voted against interracial and same sex marriage today. Holy yuck". "I’m not gay. Do I really care that 157 republicans voted against same sex marriage today in the House? F*** yes I care. Every time a minority group loses a right, we all lose," one user said. "HOW ARE THIS MANY LEGISLATORS VOTING AGAINST SAME SEX MARRIAGE WHAT THE F," one user said.

TOP STORIES

Tale of TikTok perverts: Moms are deleting ALL videos of their children as creeps follow toddler Wren Eleanor

Republican bill requires fathers to pay child support for UNBORN BABIES

'Marriage is between a man and a woman'

Some social media users are against the bill too. "Marriage in the Lord’s eyes is between a man and a woman period end of story," one user wrote. "90% of "conservatives" in favor of same sex "marriage" are only in favor of it because they are cowards and afraid of backlash. They bend to the will of the Left and must be replaced," said one user. "Because there is no reason for them to be married, they are trying to be freeloaders in a Government system intended to encourage people to have kids," one user wrote. A user commented, "Normal humans do immoral things all the time. Doesn't mean we should promote it and allow the perversion of marriage in our country."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.